Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 05 Jun 2001 00:49:20 +0900
From:      Shigeyuki Fukushima (=?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCSiFFZ0xQRzcbKEI=?=) <shige@FreeBSD.org>
To:        sheldonh@starjuice.net
Cc:        shige@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: WITHOUT_X vs. WITHOUT_X11 vs. NO_X 
Message-ID:  <20010604155420560.WOQQ.24728.t-mta3.odn.ne.jp@mta3.odn.ne.jp>
In-Reply-To: <7782.991637382@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za>
References:  <15127.62143.888966.869172@guru.mired.org> <7782.991637382@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net>
Subject: Re: WITHOUT_X vs. WITHOUT_X11 vs. NO_X 
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 08:49:42 +0200

Hello.

> Guys, whether we use WITHOUT_X11 or WITHOUT_X, changes will have to be
> made.  Since WITHOUT_X makes a little bit more sense than WITHOUT_X11,
> let's just make the changes and be done with it.

I think so, too :)

If we want to control ports by X VERSION, we sould use
XFREE86_VERSION or such new variables. :)

And, I think that we should use XFree86's Version rather
than `X' Version. :)

# But now, XFREE86_VERSION has only major version for XFree86...

--- shige


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010604155420560.WOQQ.24728.t-mta3.odn.ne.jp>